6 Nations Round 4 - England v Ireland

First topic message reminder :

England v Ireland

Twickers, London
Saturday 12th March 2022
Kick Off - 1645hrs

England team


Ireland team

New Zirelanders

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:No not concerned at all with Irelands depth in the backs apart from at out half.

Why would you be? You can just pop over to NZ and grab another "project player"

Its more to do with the number of quality Irish backs in the squad and coming through and the fact that the under 20s are playing Scotland for a grand slam having only lost a couple of games in the last few years. Both the senior side and the under 20s have scored 20 tries in 4 matches. Of the 3 Kiwis only JGP is a nailed on starter at the moment.

How are Englands backs doing? Will you be worried if England finish 5th again?

ebop wrote:New Zirelanders

They couldnt get into the NZ squad as NZ picks too many Samoans, Fijians and Tongans. Horses for courses

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:No not concerned at all with Irelands depth in the backs apart from at out half.

Why would you be? You can just pop over to NZ and grab another "project player"

Its more to do with the number of quality Irish backs in the squad and coming through and the fact that the under 20s are playing Scotland for a grand slam having only lost a couple of games in the last few years. Both the senior side and the under 20s have scored 20 tries in 4 matches. Of the 3 Kiwis only JGP is a nailed on starter at the moment.

How are Englands backs doing? Will you be worried if England finish 5th again?

No wonder you score so many tries with all those kiwi's in your backline.....

So England have only scored 7 tries because your backs are all English. Is that your excuse? Or is it because they play 10 man rugby?

If anything I think England might have been lucky to get a red card as it gave them an excuse for being very average in attack.

Ah, the age old eligibility argument. Never gets old....

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:No not concerned at all with Irelands depth in the backs apart from at out half.

Why would you be? You can just pop over to NZ and grab another "project player"

Its more to do with the number of quality Irish backs in the squad and coming through and the fact that the under 20s are playing Scotland for a grand slam having only lost a couple of games in the last few years. Both the senior side and the under 20s have scored 20 tries in 4 matches. Of the 3 Kiwis only JGP is a nailed on starter at the moment.

How are Englands backs doing? Will you be worried if England finish 5th again?

But for a yellow and a red we'd be going for a slam this weekend which shows you can't simply point at a place in a table and come to the correct conclusion of where a team is.

Collapse2005 wrote:So England have only scored 7 tries because your backs are all English. Is that your excuse? Or is it because they play 10 man rugby?

If anything I think England might have been lucky to get a red card as it gave them an excuse for being very average in attack.

Surely it was 9 man rugby in which we outplayed you though. 10 man and we would have easily won.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:No not concerned at all with Irelands depth in the backs apart from at out half.

Why would you be? You can just pop over to NZ and grab another "project player"

Its more to do with the number of quality Irish backs in the squad and coming through and the fact that the under 20s are playing Scotland for a grand slam having only lost a couple of games in the last few years. Both the senior side and the under 20s have scored 20 tries in 4 matches. Of the 3 Kiwis only JGP is a nailed on starter at the moment.

How are Englands backs doing? Will you be worried if England finish 5th again?

But for a yellow and a red we'd be going for a slam this weekend which shows you can't simply point at a place in a table and come to the correct conclusion of where a team is.

Id be more likely to agree with you if it wasnt the 2nd year in a row that your boys finish in the bottom 3 though to be fair there are always small margins in the 6n.

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:No not concerned at all with Irelands depth in the backs apart from at out half.

Why would you be? You can just pop over to NZ and grab another "project player"

Its more to do with the number of quality Irish backs in the squad and coming through and the fact that the under 20s are playing Scotland for a grand slam having only lost a couple of games in the last few years. Both the senior side and the under 20s have scored 20 tries in 4 matches. Of the 3 Kiwis only JGP is a nailed on starter at the moment.

How are Englands backs doing? Will you be worried if England finish 5th again?

But for a yellow and a red we'd be going for a slam this weekend which shows you can't simply point at a place in a table and come to the correct conclusion of where a team is.

Finishing 5th 2 years on the bounce surely shows where a side are? You have scored 7 tries this tournament against last years 12 (albeit having played one game less) so unless you score 6 tried against France I would certainly say England have gone backwards.

Collapse2005 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:No not concerned at all with Irelands depth in the backs apart from at out half.

Why would you be? You can just pop over to NZ and grab another "project player"

Its more to do with the number of quality Irish backs in the squad and coming through and the fact that the under 20s are playing Scotland for a grand slam having only lost a couple of games in the last few years. Both the senior side and the under 20s have scored 20 tries in 4 matches. Of the 3 Kiwis only JGP is a nailed on starter at the moment.

How are Englands backs doing? Will you be worried if England finish 5th again?

But for a yellow and a red we'd be going for a slam this weekend which shows you can't simply point at a place in a table and come to the correct conclusion of where a team is.

Id be more likely to agree with you if it wasnt the 2nd year in a row that your boys finish in the bottom 3 though to be fair there are always small margins in the 6n.

Last year was meh. But if you want to see the contributing factors there it was discussed in depth after the tournament. If we can play as badly as this and still feel we should/could be 4 from 4 then it's not a doom and gloom case. Made a similar observation the other way when Wales won it last year.

Collapse2005 wrote:

ebop wrote:New Zirelanders

They couldnt get into the NZ squad as NZ picks too many Samoans, Fijians and Tongans. Horses for courses

Can you please send some of the ‘amazing’ rugby players and coaches that Ireland produce our way. Like NZ does to Samoa, Fiji and Tonga. That way it would be reciprocated. For Ireland, it’s just take take take isn’t it? But it’s ok, Aki and Lowe and whoever else the people are can come home to NZ after they’ve done their dash for us to laugh at. They have no integrity because they will not live in Ireland when their rugby careers are done.

You see few rugby players from Europe going to NZ because of lack of cash. Its not down to playing ability.

ebop wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

ebop wrote:New Zirelanders

They couldnt get into the NZ squad as NZ picks too many Samoans, Fijians and Tongans. Horses for courses

Can you please send some of the ‘amazing’ rugby players and coaches that Ireland produce our way. Like NZ does to Samoa, Fiji and Tonga. That way it would be reciprocated. For Ireland, it’s just take take take isn’t it? But it’s ok, Aki and Lowe and whoever else the people are can come home to NZ after they’ve done their dash for us to laugh at. They have no integrity because they will not live in Ireland when their rugby careers are done.

Integrity and giving back arent really things people associate with NZ rugby. They only let a Fijian side in super rugby for the first time ever because they ran out of options. Professionalism in the islands doesnt suit NZs programme of stealing under age amature talent.

Collapse2005 wrote:

ebop wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

ebop wrote:New Zirelanders

They couldnt get into the NZ squad as NZ picks too many Samoans, Fijians and Tongans. Horses for courses

Can you please send some of the ‘amazing’ rugby players and coaches that Ireland produce our way. Like NZ does to Samoa, Fiji and Tonga. That way it would be reciprocated. For Ireland, it’s just take take take isn’t it? But it’s ok, Aki and Lowe and whoever else the people are can come home to NZ after they’ve done their dash for us to laugh at. They have no integrity because they will not live in Ireland when their rugby careers are done.

Integrity and giving back arent really things people associate with NZ rugby. They only let a Fijian side in super rugby for the first time ever because they ran out of options. Professionalism in the islands doesnt suit NZs programme of stealing under age amature talent.

Look at the players and coaches that have made up the Polynesian and Fijian sides over the years. You’ll soon discover you’re just a bit ignorant.

Im sure most of them would rather play professional rugby in their own countries rather than travel thousands of miles to the great humanitarians of world rugby New Zealand. Always doing such good for no gain.

If NZ really cared about Tonga, Fiji and Samoa they wouldnt have waited until the ran out of options elsewhere to allow two island teams join super rugby. Even at that one of the teams is based in NZ and is basically another NZ side. Talk about hollow gestures. It suits NZ to keep professionalism out of those countries so the conveyer belt of underage amature talent keeps coming.

Collapse2005 wrote:Im sure most of them would rather play professional rugby in their own countries rather than travel thousands of miles to the great humanitarians of world rugby New Zealand. Always doing such good for no gain.

Think you’ll find most were born in NZ. Ah well guns, happy St Patricks day, have a good one mate

Happy St Patrick day to you too.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:No not concerned at all with Irelands depth in the backs apart from at out half.

Why would you be? You can just pop over to NZ and grab another "project player"

If only we could be like England and only use homegrown players... Oh wait.

Well project players are, largely, going to become a thing of the past as it’s now 5 years not 3.
There are no such 10 s in the Irish set up, and I don’t think Johnny can keep going for 5 more years.

There is an international class 10 playing in England but the IRFU have burnt their bridges on that one.

And rightly so.

Totally agree.

I would be so much happier if Ireland we’re starting with:

Murray or Cooney instead of JGP
Henshaw or McCloskey instead of Aki
Baloucoune instead of Lowe

The really frustrating thing I don’t see the Irishmen as a drop in standard,
If anything they are an improvement

Oh I don't care about the 3 year rule.

I don’t think there should be any eligibility rule for adults
If a person moves from a first tier rugby nation to another first tier rugby nation, after they become 18 I don’t think they should ever be allowed to play for the country they moved to.
Younger than 18 then a 5 year rule applies.

I know that this is never going to come to pass but project players lessen my support for Ireland, especially when excellent local lads are denied caps

I think I would feel the same Geoff tbh. Even the term "project player" doesn't sit right with me.

Collapse2005 wrote:

No 7&1/2 wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:

Collapse2005 wrote:No not concerned at all with Irelands depth in the backs apart from at out half.

Why would you be? You can just pop over to NZ and grab another "project player"

Its more to do with the number of quality Irish backs in the squad and coming through and the fact that the under 20s are playing Scotland for a grand slam having only lost a couple of games in the last few years. Both the senior side and the under 20s have scored 20 tries in 4 matches. Of the 3 Kiwis only JGP is a nailed on starter at the moment.

How are Englands backs doing? Will you be worried if England finish 5th again?

But for a yellow and a red we'd be going for a slam this weekend which shows you can't simply point at a place in a table and come to the correct conclusion of where a team is.

Id be more likely to agree with you if it wasnt the 2nd year in a row that your boys finish in the bottom 3 though to be fair there are always small margins in the 6n.

3rd is bottom 4 not bottom 3

It’s more like joint 4th. Winning two games and coming 3rd is quite a long way off the pace.

Collapse2005 wrote:It’s more like joint 4th. Winning two games and coming 3rd is quite a long way off the pace.

Nope, it clearly says 3rd on the BBC.....just below Ireland who finished 2nd, not joint 1st.

England won two games from 5. That puts them firmly in the bottom rung of the championship no matter what way you look at it. Englands got 3rd and not 4th because their points difference of 5 was better than Scotlands however, they finished on the same number of points 10 each. Joint 4th is much more accurate reflection of their season as the bottom four teams are way behind Ireland and France this year.

No matter which way you look at it, England finished 3rd. In the same way that Ireland finished 2nd......it's not an argument Collapse.

The grass is also green (I'm sure you could argue against this of course).

3 to 6 is bottom half this year. You only won one more game than Italy. That makes you much closer to the bottom team than the top team.

Collapse2005 wrote:3 to 6 is bottom half this year. You only won one more game than Italy. That makes you much closer to the bottom team than the top team.

I've just checked again, we're still 3rd.

Actually using some math wizardry.......6 divided by 2 (a half if you will) is 3. That would mean that positions 1, 2 and 3 are top half and positions 4, 5 and 6 are bottom. Who'd of thought.....you're wrong again

Lol England are definitely a bottom rung side this year. Can you use maths to give England more than 2 wins from 5 too?

I don't need to, we finished 3rd (I checked again).....that's top 3, just behind Ireland (they finished 2nd, that's top 2).

Collapse2005 wrote:Lol England are definitely a bottom rung side this year. Can you use maths to give England more than 2 wins from 5 too?

Are you OTS on BBC? Just wondering because he likes to do whatever he can to put negative slant on all things England.

Anyway, table is what it is.

Finishing third numerically means absolutely nothing when England are actually much closer in points and games won than Italy at bottom than the top two sides Ireland and France. Then again England do celebrate losses these days so its not surprising.

We still finished 3rd.

Actually in a "League system" (google it), the position you finish in is where you rank that year. I know it's quite hard to get your head around, but theoretically, England were the 3rd best side in this years 6N due to this league ranking system thing, because they finished 3rd.

France finish position 1, so are therefore the 1st best side.

I know it's difficult, maybe we just leave it there?

Just checked still closer in wins to Italy, still a bottom rung team this year.

Collapse2005 wrote:Just checked still closer in wins to Italy, still a bottom rung team this year.

Are we still 3rd though? You know, in the top half? Actually just look behind Ireland, are we still there?

To be honest in reality finishing 3/4/5 pretty irrelevant. Better than last but Eng/Scot/Wal all well off top and don't deserve to be either.
However, purely from a psychological point of view higher the better. Players will rightly or wrongly feel they have achieved something. If results gone another way England could have finished 5th again which would have been very damaging.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:We still finished 3rd.

Actually in a "League system" (google it), the position you finish in is where you rank that year. I know it's quite hard to get your head around, but theoretically, England were the 3rd best side in this years 6N due to this league ranking system thing, because they finished 3rd.

France finish position 1, so are therefore the 1st best side.

I know it's difficult, maybe we just leave it there?

You can never tell how good a team is by the 6 nations. Its not really a league nearer to a cup comp.

Ha no England are definitely not just behind Ireland at the moment. Id say England are about 3 years behind France and maybe 2 behind Ireland.

Nope......just checked again, 3 still follows 2.

You really have a hard time with numbers fella don't you.

Let him have it Pooly. He knows they were outplayed by 14 men, the table is the only thing he has. If his education says top half is bottom rung so be it.

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Nope......just checked again, 3 still follows 2.

You really have a hard time with numbers fella don't you.

You are intentionally missing the point, its irrelevant if England finished 3rd as their points and win tally reflect a bottom half side. Bottom half is a much truer reflection of their year.

No 7&1/2 wrote:Let him have it Pooly. He knows they were outplayed by 14 men, the table is the only thing he has. If his education says top half is bottom rung so be it.

Its unlike you to get personal. Shame.

No shame in putting down a wum.

Collapse2005 wrote:

Sgt_Pooly wrote:Nope......just checked again, 3 still follows 2.

You really have a hard time with numbers fella don't you.

You are intentionally missing the point, its irrelevant if England finished 3rd as their points and win tally reflect a bottom half side. Bottom half is a much truer reflection of their year.

Fine margins though - but for a red card, England and Ireland may have finished on the same number of wins ... and if the officials were able to spot one of the at least two knock-ons in the build-up to the second French try that may have been a different story too. England no doubt have underperformed but the potential is there for a big improvement.

I think generally as soon as you start making things personal you've lost the arguement.